Just a piece of advice for negotiating with NU: if you have an offer from a higher-ranked school that you didn't list here, you should use that. Offers from higher-ranked schools are better leverage for scholarship reconsideration.

Thabks so much for the advice so far! Assuming I try to negotiate with NU and fail do you think they are worth the extra ~ 25k in COA over michigan? Does Michigan have comparatively poor chicago placement and will it be a lot harder to get back to chicago from there? Thanks again!

I really want to do biglaw in Chicago. It would probably be biglaw in Chicago > other legal job in Chicago > NYC biglaw

I have very strong ties to the area. I went to undergrad here, my entire family and SO are here. I have a 1.5 year experience as a paralegal at a mid size specialty firm in Chicago.

I took the LSAT once: 176/3.6x

I will be financing everything through loans. My other offers are NYU (65k scholarship) and Columbia (50k scholarship)

Any insight is helpful! I got all my deadlines extended until end of next week...let me know if addtl info is necessary or would be helpful! Thanks!

NU hands down. Michigan places well in Chicago but NU absolutely dominates in that market. You could make an argument for Duke/Michigan if you got a full ride, but 10k to 25k isn't big enough.

Local reputation is obviously part of it. K&E Chicago hires tons (I think it was 10-15 my year) of summer associates. You see the same pattern, although not as pronounced, among other Chicago firms.

But a bigger part is the access you get to useful connections. You have a huge network of alumni who will be pulling for you throughout your entire career. You have professors who are well known in the city who could be making calls on your behalf. You can do externships during the year with local employers (e.g. courts, small firms, public interest) I clerked at NDIL and that courthouse was absolutely filled with NU law clerks (probably because so many judges went to NU as well.)

Think of paying extra to go to NU as a long term investment in your legal career in Chicago.

tlsuser242 wrote:Thabks so much for the advice so far! Assuming I try to negotiate with NU and fail do you think they are worth the extra ~ 25k in COA over michigan? Does Michigan have comparatively poor chicago placement and will it be a lot harder to get back to chicago from there? Thanks again!

I really think that there is more of an argument to be made for Michigan here. Its offer is larger, and it's COA is lower in the first place. I think, after interest, that the difference is probably more like 40-50k. I currently work at K&E and will attending Michigan starting next month. K&E in particular is a huge presence at Michigan. There are two K&E professors of law, and there is a huge café in the main common area of the Law School called K&E Café. I have worked with a huge amount of Michigan grads, and while there are very many NU grads at K&E, Michigan is very well represented. It is easily 3rd place after NU and the U of C. In addition, I have heard from partners that I know play a role in the hiring process that Michigan grads sought after just as much as NU grads. The University of Michigan itself is also a large presence in Chicago, and it is a very highly regarded school in the Midwest especially. You're going to see that same kind of respect for Michigan grads in BigLaw firms throughout Chicago.

It is definitely something of a fallacy to go from the fact that a ton of NU grads are employed in Chicago to the idea that NU has more placement power than Michigan in Chicago. Of course NU sends the bulk of its grads into Chicago just like Columbia and NYU send the bulk of their grads to New York firms. When you have a local market for BigLaw, it is hardly surprising that you find a huge number of grads from schools like NU and the U of C in Chicago and Columbia and NYU in New York.

With this in mind, it is not really fair to say that NU is a better school to attend to get Chicago Biglaw. We could get a much more accurate idea if we had a way to know the number of applicants that apply to Chicago BigLaw vs. those that actually get it. I have a hard time believing (and my conversations with partners verify this) that a Chicago firm is going to look at NU vs. UMich on a resume and make their decision based on that. It just doesn't make any sense.

Unless you can get NU to budge on the scholly offer, I would say that Michigan is a very solid option. Like I said, the difference is 50k, and on a 10-year repayment plan that boils down to about $700/month. That's not an insignificant amount of money for what seems to me to be a dubious benefit at best.

Also, I know you think you want Chicago BigLaw now (and so do I), but another reason that I personally chose Michigan was the mobility. You do see Michigan grads spread out more than graduates from any other T-14. Why not keep your options open, save 50k, and still have a very solid (and I'd say roughly equal) shot at Chicago BigLaw?

Mich employment rates for biglaw is horrible for its law school ranking. Take NU, even if it is slightly more expensive. NU does great in biglaw placement in Chicago. I wouldn't take the risk for that slight difference.

GFox345 wrote:I really think that there is more of an argument to be made for Michigan here. Its offer is larger, and it's COA is lower in the first place. I think, after interest, that the difference is probably more like 40-50k. I currently work at K&E and will attending Michigan starting next month. K&E in particular is a huge presence at Michigan. There are two K&E professors of law, and there is a huge café in the main common area of the Law School called K&E Café. I have worked with a huge amount of Michigan grads, and while there are very many NU grads at K&E, Michigan is very well represented. It is easily 3rd place after NU and the U of C. In addition, I have heard from partners that I know play a role in the hiring process that Michigan grads sought after just as much as NU grads. The University of Michigan itself is also a large presence in Chicago, and it is a very highly regarded school in the Midwest especially. You're going to see that same kind of respect for Michigan grads in BigLaw firms throughout Chicago.

It is definitely something of a fallacy to go from the fact that a ton of NU grads are employed in Chicago to the idea that NU has more placement power than Michigan in Chicago. Of course NU sends the bulk of its grads into Chicago just like Columbia and NYU send the bulk of their grads to New York firms. When you have a local market for BigLaw, it is hardly surprising that you find a huge number of grads from schools like NU and the U of C in Chicago and Columbia and NYU in New York.

With this in mind, it is not really fair to say that NU is a better school to attend to get Chicago Biglaw. We could get a much more accurate idea if we had a way to know the number of applicants that apply to Chicago BigLaw vs. those that actually get it. I have a hard time believing (and my conversations with partners verify this) that a Chicago firm is going to look at NU vs. UMich on a resume and make their decision based on that. It just doesn't make any sense.

Unless you can get NU to budge on the scholly offer, No would say that Michigan is a very solid option. Like I said, the difference is 50k, and on a 10-year repayment plan that boils down to about $700/month. That's not an insignificant amount of money for what seems to me to be a dubious benefit at best.

Also, I know you think you want Chicago BigLaw now (and so do I), but another reason that I personally chose Michigan was the mobility. You do see Michigan grads spread out more than graduates from any other T-14. Why not keep your options open, save 50k, and still have a very solid (and I'd say roughly equal) shot at Chicago BigLaw?

I mean sure, you obviously might have more kids at Michigan who go to NY and other places than Chicago. Fact of the matter is though that NU will get you a substantially better chance at biglaw in Chicago than Michigan. NU biglaw percentage is 62.15%, Michigan is 50.85%. That's 12% more biglaw placement, I'd say that's substantial. I'd say it's not a fallacy at all to say NU has better biglaw placement in Chicago than Michigan. NU also is, you know, in Chicago. You have direct access to alumni (and a much larger Chicago alumni network than Michigan) versus just phone calls/emails/occasional trip.

And while it is great Michigan has a K&E cafe, it's not like that actually makes a difference in someone at K&E's mind in deciding between a NU and Michigan grad (Edit: or that all the "K&E" stuff will matter at all for literally any other firm in Chicago). Michigan does have a great reputation in Midwest for biglaw hiring, NU just has better placement statistics in (1) biglaw in general and (2) Chicago biglaw most likely...

Whether this difference makes up for the 40k+ difference in total is for OP to decide. I'd probably say it's worth it, especially considering his whole family is there.

GFox345 wrote:I really think that there is more of an argument to be made for Michigan here. Its offer is larger, and it's COA is lower in the first place. I think, after interest, that the difference is probably more like 40-50k. I currently work at K&E and will attending Michigan starting next month. K&E in particular is a huge presence at Michigan. There are two K&E professors of law, and there is a huge café in the main common area of the Law School called K&E Café. I have worked with a huge amount of Michigan grads, and while there are very many NU grads at K&E, Michigan is very well represented. It is easily 3rd place after NU and the U of C. In addition, I have heard from partners that I know play a role in the hiring process that Michigan grads sought after just as much as NU grads. The University of Michigan itself is also a large presence in Chicago, and it is a very highly regarded school in the Midwest especially. You're going to see that same kind of respect for Michigan grads in BigLaw firms throughout Chicago.

It is definitely something of a fallacy to go from the fact that a ton of NU grads are employed in Chicago to the idea that NU has more placement power than Michigan in Chicago. Of course NU sends the bulk of its grads into Chicago just like Columbia and NYU send the bulk of their grads to New York firms. When you have a local market for BigLaw, it is hardly surprising that you find a huge number of grads from schools like NU and the U of C in Chicago and Columbia and NYU in New York.

With this in mind, it is not really fair to say that NU is a better school to attend to get Chicago Biglaw. We could get a much more accurate idea if we had a way to know the number of applicants that apply to Chicago BigLaw vs. those that actually get it. I have a hard time believing (and my conversations with partners verify this) that a Chicago firm is going to look at NU vs. UMich on a resume and make their decision based on that. It just doesn't make any sense.

Unless you can get NU to budge on the scholly offer, No would say that Michigan is a very solid option. Like I said, the difference is 50k, and on a 10-year repayment plan that boils down to about $700/month. That's not an insignificant amount of money for what seems to me to be a dubious benefit at best.

Also, I know you think you want Chicago BigLaw now (and so do I), but another reason that I personally chose Michigan was the mobility. You do see Michigan grads spread out more than graduates from any other T-14. Why not keep your options open, save 50k, and still have a very solid (and I'd say roughly equal) shot at Chicago BigLaw?

I mean sure, you obviously might have more kids at Michigan who go to NY and other places than Chicago. Fact of the matter is though that NU will get you a substantially better chance at biglaw in Chicago than Michigan. NU biglaw percentage is 62.15%, Michigan is 50.85%. That's 12% more biglaw placement, I'd say that's substantial. I'd say it's not a fallacy at all to say NU has better biglaw placement in Chicago than Michigan. NU also is, you know, in Chicago. You have direct access to alumni (and a much larger Chicago alumni network than Michigan) versus just phone calls/emails/occasional trip.

And while it is great Michigan has a K&E cafe, it's not like that actually makes a difference in someone at K&E's mind in deciding between a NU and Michigan grad (Edit: or that all the "K&E" stuff will matter at all for literally any other firm in Chicago). Michigan does have a great reputation in Midwest for biglaw hiring, NU just has better placement statistics in (1) biglaw in general and (2) Chicago biglaw most likely...

Whether this difference makes up for the 40k+ difference in total is for OP to decide. I'd probably say it's worth it, especially considering his whole family is there.

Huh? The placement for biglaw/fed clerk for class of 2015 is the below. Are you posting about Chicago or just making up shit out of your ass?

GFox345 wrote:I really think that there is more of an argument to be made for Michigan here. Its offer is larger, and it's COA is lower in the first place. I think, after interest, that the difference is probably more like 40-50k. I currently work at K&E and will attending Michigan starting next month. K&E in particular is a huge presence at Michigan. There are two K&E professors of law, and there is a huge café in the main common area of the Law School called K&E Café. I have worked with a huge amount of Michigan grads, and while there are very many NU grads at K&E, Michigan is very well represented. It is easily 3rd place after NU and the U of C. In addition, I have heard from partners that I know play a role in the hiring process that Michigan grads sought after just as much as NU grads. The University of Michigan itself is also a large presence in Chicago, and it is a very highly regarded school in the Midwest especially. You're going to see that same kind of respect for Michigan grads in BigLaw firms throughout Chicago.

It is definitely something of a fallacy to go from the fact that a ton of NU grads are employed in Chicago to the idea that NU has more placement power than Michigan in Chicago. Of course NU sends the bulk of its grads into Chicago just like Columbia and NYU send the bulk of their grads to New York firms. When you have a local market for BigLaw, it is hardly surprising that you find a huge number of grads from schools like NU and the U of C in Chicago and Columbia and NYU in New York.

With this in mind, it is not really fair to say that NU is a better school to attend to get Chicago Biglaw. We could get a much more accurate idea if we had a way to know the number of applicants that apply to Chicago BigLaw vs. those that actually get it. I have a hard time believing (and my conversations with partners verify this) that a Chicago firm is going to look at NU vs. UMich on a resume and make their decision based on that. It just doesn't make any sense.

Unless you can get NU to budge on the scholly offer, No would say that Michigan is a very solid option. Like I said, the difference is 50k, and on a 10-year repayment plan that boils down to about $700/month. That's not an insignificant amount of money for what seems to me to be a dubious benefit at best.

Also, I know you think you want Chicago BigLaw now (and so do I), but another reason that I personally chose Michigan was the mobility. You do see Michigan grads spread out more than graduates from any other T-14. Why not keep your options open, save 50k, and still have a very solid (and I'd say roughly equal) shot at Chicago BigLaw?

I mean sure, you obviously might have more kids at Michigan who go to NY and other places than Chicago. Fact of the matter is though that NU will get you a substantially better chance at biglaw in Chicago than Michigan. NU biglaw percentage is 62.15%, Michigan is 50.85%. That's 12% more biglaw placement, I'd say that's substantial. I'd say it's not a fallacy at all to say NU has better biglaw placement in Chicago than Michigan. NU also is, you know, in Chicago. You have direct access to alumni (and a much larger Chicago alumni network than Michigan) versus just phone calls/emails/occasional trip.

And while it is great Michigan has a K&E cafe, it's not like that actually makes a difference in someone at K&E's mind in deciding between a NU and Michigan grad (Edit: or that all the "K&E" stuff will matter at all for literally any other firm in Chicago). Michigan does have a great reputation in Midwest for biglaw hiring, NU just has better placement statistics in (1) biglaw in general and (2) Chicago biglaw most likely...

Whether this difference makes up for the 40k+ difference in total is for OP to decide. I'd probably say it's worth it, especially considering his whole family is there.

Huh? The placement for biglaw/fed clerk for class of 2015 is the below. Are you posting about Chicago or just making up shit out of your ass?

NU: 69% Mich: 61%

I think he's talking about just big law in general. As in your numbers minus fed clerkships.

GFox345 wrote:I really think that there is more of an argument to be made for Michigan here. Its offer is larger, and it's COA is lower in the first place. I think, after interest, that the difference is probably more like 40-50k. I currently work at K&E and will attending Michigan starting next month. K&E in particular is a huge presence at Michigan. There are two K&E professors of law, and there is a huge café in the main common area of the Law School called K&E Café. I have worked with a huge amount of Michigan grads, and while there are very many NU grads at K&E, Michigan is very well represented. It is easily 3rd place after NU and the U of C. In addition, I have heard from partners that I know play a role in the hiring process that Michigan grads sought after just as much as NU grads. The University of Michigan itself is also a large presence in Chicago, and it is a very highly regarded school in the Midwest especially. You're going to see that same kind of respect for Michigan grads in BigLaw firms throughout Chicago.

It is definitely something of a fallacy to go from the fact that a ton of NU grads are employed in Chicago to the idea that NU has more placement power than Michigan in Chicago. Of course NU sends the bulk of its grads into Chicago just like Columbia and NYU send the bulk of their grads to New York firms. When you have a local market for BigLaw, it is hardly surprising that you find a huge number of grads from schools like NU and the U of C in Chicago and Columbia and NYU in New York.

With this in mind, it is not really fair to say that NU is a better school to attend to get Chicago Biglaw. We could get a much more accurate idea if we had a way to know the number of applicants that apply to Chicago BigLaw vs. those that actually get it. I have a hard time believing (and my conversations with partners verify this) that a Chicago firm is going to look at NU vs. UMich on a resume and make their decision based on that. It just doesn't make any sense.

Unless you can get NU to budge on the scholly offer, No would say that Michigan is a very solid option. Like I said, the difference is 50k, and on a 10-year repayment plan that boils down to about $700/month. That's not an insignificant amount of money for what seems to me to be a dubious benefit at best.

Also, I know you think you want Chicago BigLaw now (and so do I), but another reason that I personally chose Michigan was the mobility. You do see Michigan grads spread out more than graduates from any other T-14. Why not keep your options open, save 50k, and still have a very solid (and I'd say roughly equal) shot at Chicago BigLaw?

I mean sure, you obviously might have more kids at Michigan who go to NY and other places than Chicago. Fact of the matter is though that NU will get you a substantially better chance at biglaw in Chicago than Michigan. NU biglaw percentage is 62.15%, Michigan is 50.85%. That's 12% more biglaw placement, I'd say that's substantial. I'd say it's not a fallacy at all to say NU has better biglaw placement in Chicago than Michigan. NU also is, you know, in Chicago. You have direct access to alumni (and a much larger Chicago alumni network than Michigan) versus just phone calls/emails/occasional trip.

And while it is great Michigan has a K&E cafe, it's not like that actually makes a difference in someone at K&E's mind in deciding between a NU and Michigan grad (Edit: or that all the "K&E" stuff will matter at all for literally any other firm in Chicago). Michigan does have a great reputation in Midwest for biglaw hiring, NU just has better placement statistics in (1) biglaw in general and (2) Chicago biglaw most likely...

Whether this difference makes up for the 40k+ difference in total is for OP to decide. I'd probably say it's worth it, especially considering his whole family is there.

Huh? The placement for biglaw/fed clerk for class of 2015 is the below. Are you posting about Chicago or just making up shit out of your ass?

NU: 69% Mich: 61%

I think he's talking about just big law in general. As in your numbers minus fed clerkships.

If so (and I'm too lazy to check the numbers), that's just retarded, because everybody knows clerkships >>>>>>>>>>> biglaw in terms of selectivity.

^Agree with above. I've seen several people this cycle with numbers worse than yours get significantly more money from NU (i.e. $150k+). You should be getting more money from all of these schools actually.

I was just talking about big law placement (I subtracted fed clerkship rates).

The OP specifically mentioned he wanted to do Chicago big law, hence my emphasis on the big law numbers. Clerkships are more selective by far, yeah you're right, but it's not like everyone wants to do clerkships in the first place.

If OP is interested in transactional related work a clerkship isn't winning him any real brownie points from a firm. If he wants litigation, sure, totally helpful. That points a little moot though, as my original point about NU bigger superior choice for big law employment (either immediately post grad or post clerkship) still stands regardless.

I was just talking about big law placement (I subtracted fed clerkship rates).

The OP specifically mentioned he wanted to do Chicago big law, hence my emphasis on the big law numbers. Clerkships are more selective by far, yeah you're right, but it's not like everyone wants to do clerkships in the first place.

If OP is interested in transactional related work a clerkship isn't winning him any real brownie points from a firm. If he wants litigation, sure, totally helpful. That points a little moot though, as my original point about NU bigger superior choice for big law employment (either immediately post grad or post clerkship) still stands regardless.

This is dumb. There's massive overlap between clerkship a and big law. The clerkship kids almost all did SAs.